Gaslighting a Nation

The British government’s recent actions around Dominic Cummings can be explained as no less than gaslighting. I’d actually take that further and say their whole response to Covid-19 has been gaslighting on a massive scale and something I personally find very upsetting and triggering.

For those who are lucky enough to not know what gaslighting is, its defined as the following:

‘manipulate (someone) by psychological means into doubting their own sanity’

Consistent lies, manipulation of reality and dismissive of facts, are all methods of gaslighting. Our government has been doing this consistently to us since the start of this pandemic and the psychological impact and lasting effects it can have on the public is frightening.

I speak from the perspective of someone who has been in a relationship where i was consistently gaslighted, to the extent that I was made to doubt something that was printed on a bank statement. I want you to take a second to consider that, I genuinely considered the possibility that the transactions on a bank statement didn’t actually happen, and it was a mistake during the printing of the statement. This was the culmination of 6 years of manipulation, control and losing all sense of self.

What’s happening in this country is just as dangerous. Already we have people dismissing scientifically proven facts because they don’t fit with that they are being told. The proof can literally be shown to them but because the government states otherwise, they believe it. I am terrified as to what this means for our future. The public is being primed for dictatorship in a new form, one they won’t be able to recognise. Slowly, more and more of our reality will be shaped by popular opinions rather than by experts and facts.

I lived through this on a small scale for nearly 7 years. It took a long time for me to trust my own judgement again and to accept the long term impact it had on me. I don’t want to see the result of the long term impact on a gaslight country, it’s a terrifying prospect, so I continue to debate with those who won’t listen and will continue to share my views in an attempt to keep reality an objective truth and not whatever our abusers Government wants it to be.

The importance of Context

Context is defined as:   “The situation within which something exists or happens, and that can help explain it”.

Context is something that we, as a society, seem to have forgotten about. When the latest atrocity hits our news outlets we look at it in isolation. We try and analyse why it has happened, what could have caused it but this is done without taking into account the context in which the act happened. By dismissing societal norms and ignoring outside influences (unless its extremist islam, we actively look for that)  we fail to fully understand the situation.

Everyday situations also require us to consider context. We are quick to judge or jump to conclusions about each other but often this is done without holding all of the facts. This leads us to a narrow view and understanding of the world.

Recently I have wanted to scream the word context at so many reports on the news or to peoples arguments online. The media takes issues or topics in isolation to report them but this has lead society to treat all things in this manner. Arguments or opinions should be informed with supporting facts and many of these facts are related to the incident, not neccesarily just about that one incident.

Until society, including mediaoutlets, start to discuss things in their context, we cannot hope to reach an understanding of how to stop it from happening again or how to solve the problem at hand. Knowledge leads to understanding which in turn can lead to solutions. Without all the facts, we can never resolve an problem effectively.

Domestic Violence: Where are the male victims?

The Home Office definition of a domestic violence incident is:

Any incident or threatening behaviour, violence or abuse (psychological, physical, sexual, financial or emotional) between adults who are or have been intimate partners or are family members, regardless of gender or sexuality.

Domestic abuse is a subject which has received more coverage and legislation in the past few years thanks to various charities and organisations hard work to raise awareness that although it happens behind closed doors, that is not where it should remain. More convictions are now made with harsher punishments as police institutions are being taught to treat these incidents with the seriousness they deserve. Despite this, 1 in 4 women experience domestic violence over their lifetimes and between 6-10% of women suffer domestic violence in a given year.  Lesser known facts about domestic violence centres around that of violence against men with 14.7% of men report that they have been a victim of domestic abuse since they were 16. To put this into perspective; of every three victims of domestic abuse, two will be women and one will be male.

Male domestic abuse still has a stigma attached to it illustrated by the reluctance of men to report these incidents to the police. This also means that it tends to be under-reported giving the false illusion that it is not as large an issue as domestic violence against women.

Male victims are twice as likely than women to not tell anyone about partner abuse due to this stigma leaving many of them to suffer in silence. This choice to stay silent can be due to numerous reasons, many of them personal, but society places expectations on the male identity to be the strong and dominant one in a relationship; for a man to admit that this is not the case strips him of his masculinity in the eyes of some in society.  For a man to be beaten by their female partner is viewed by society as being unlikely as the male is normally more physically powerful than their female partner. However, psychical strength has little to nothing to do with abuse.

Very little support is available for men in these situations. Some charities do exist but there are only 12 organisations that offer refuge with 63 spaces, of which only 17 are dedicated to male victims of domestic abuse. Compared to the nearly 400 specialist organisations for women that offer over 4000 spaces in the UK and the disparity between the sexes becomes ever starker. More support needs to be made available and this will come naturally once society’s perception of male domestic abuse evolves.

Traditional ideas of masculinity and femininity are damaging to our self-perception and relationships. A man, just like a woman, should not stay in an abusive relationship, whether this is physical, mental or sexual abuse. For men to feel more comfortable reporting these cases institutions such as the police and schools need to be educated and educate society about the harm not reporting can cause and to make it more socially acceptable for men to come forward as victims of domestic violence. Only then can this issue be taken out of the dark and the correct support provided for all that needs it. Domestic violence is not just a woman’s issue, it is a societal one.

Note: I have not addressed Domestic Violence in LGBT relationships in this piece specifically but I will at a later date and have another blog piece dedicated to the myriad of issues that comes with it.

The new age of colouring

Mental health has been in the papers, yet again, for all the wrong reasons. The recent German-Wings tradegy which has left over 150 people dead is being blamed on the co-pilots ongoing battle with depression. This coverage is leading to the idea that anyone suffering from this mental illness isn’t fit to work and undermines some recebt progress that has been made towards lifing the stigma associated with depression.

 Thankfully, despite this coverage, there has been a rise in new ways to manage stress, anxiety and depression. The most popular of which is adult colouring books.

‘Secret Garden’, a book by Johanna Basford, has sold more than 1.4m copies and hit the top of Amazon’s bestseller list this month. This is a book consisting of 96 pages of intricate floral and animal designs to be coloured in anyway the ‘artist’ desires. This is one of many of these types of books on the market. The quiet focus this involves invokes a deep relaxation allowing the mind and body to let go of stress and anxiety. Colouring requires artistic choices to be made in regards to colour and design promoting the use of our creative faculties which has been proven to help individuals manage depression.

Children are encouraged to colour as it can aid creativity and learning, why should the same thing not apply to adults? As we get older we forget to play and life becomes a series of worries and planning for the future. By going back to basics we allow our minds to wander free and to get back a sense of fun we experienced as children which in turn can help to manage these everyday stresses and any mental illnesses associated with them. These books are meant for everyone, so grab a pen and a book and get creative.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.theguardian.com/books/gallery/2015/mar/05/colour-therapy-an-anti-stress-colouring-book-gallery

 

50 Shades of Abuse

After hearing so many different opinions on ‘50 Shades of Grey’ I finally bit the bullet and decided to read it. I felt that this was the only way I could form an honest opinion on the book. It is dreadful.

Before I even discuss the content of the book I must address the writing; it is appalling. I’ve read steamier sex scenes in a sex education pamphlet. Instead of being aroused I found myself bored and wanting it to be over. You want real sex scenes in a book? Read the Sookie Stackhouse novels. The sex scenes in 50 shades burns down to the heroine (Anastasia Steele) receiving copious amounts of oral from Christian Grey which proceeds into the missionary position. Wasn’t exactly what I was expecting to say the least.

As for the BDSM, there are fewer instances of it than I expected and most of it is very tame. A few spankings, some jiggle balls and being tied up. For many people this is not that far out of their normal sex life yet the writer tries to make the reader feel that it is all very taboo through Anastasia’s reactions.

The characters make me want to kill someone. Anastasia is a simpering idiot of a woman who has little to no personality. I hate her more than I hate Bella Swan from twilight (which funnily enough is what 50 shades of grey got its inspiration from). Christian Grey isn’t much better. His mood changes make me think he’s perpetually PMT’ing. He’s hot then he’s cold then he’s boring.

The character interactions are the only thing worth taking some time to discuss. A common complaint about this book is that it describes an abusive relationship. Having now read it in full I can say I agree. Christian controls every aspect of Ana’s life from where she goes, who she’s with to what and how much she eats. By making Ana sign a non-disclosure form he legally isolates her, preventing her from discussing their relationship and its problems with any friends or family leaving her completely reliant on Christian. Ana also starts to alter her behaviour so as not to anger Christian and repeatedly describes feeling intimidated and scared of him. Christian justifies his actions through the use of the sub/dom relationship stating that Ana should want to please Christian at all times and if she feels unhappy she should put these feelings aside for him.

A true happy consensual BDSM relationship fulfils a need that both parties have. It is conducted in a safe way that both parties have agreed to in a way that makes both participants happy. Some studies support the idea that BDSM actually makes relationships closer as long as both parties have consented to all actions involved.

This is not a happy, consensual BDSM relationship. This is the perfect description of abuse; the isolation, fear, controlling, stalking, jealousy and anger. Christian is only concerned about his own satisfaction, taking Ana’s virginity as ‘a means to an end’. Ana frequently voices her dislike of being hurt through spanking etc yet Christian proceeds to inflict this on her as it fills a need he has. He manipulates her emotionally in order for him to get what he wants. This is abuse.

For this type of relationship to be accepted and in some cases celebrated by the mainstream is harmful to society. It harms those who have experienced these relationships as well as teaching the next generation that this is acceptable behaviour. A recent study conducted found that 2 in 5 girls between the ages of 13-17 have been coerced into sex acts. This is the highest rate in Europe. Films/books like 50 shades continue to promote the idea that a girl is there to do whatever the man in the relationship wants and it encourages men to take what they want from a girl even if she’s not happy about it. This is what the media should be helping to fight, not promoting.

The book also is giving the BDSM community a bad image. It is not a place where abuse is everywhere, it is a community of people who know what they like and how to go about it in a safe manner. Nothing that is described can be called a BDSM relationship.

A campaign has been launched called #50dollarsnot50shades that encourages people to boycott the film and donate the money they would use to go see it to a woman’s crisis centre or charity. This helps those who have been in these relationships rather than supporting them. I personally think that this is a better way to spend your money than sitting through a dull film about an abusive relationship disguising itself as remarkably tame erotic.

 

Shoot first, Escape Indictment Later

This year is ending on two dramatic Grand jury decisions in America. In the space of one week, two separate grand juries’ have decided not to indict two separate police officers that would have been charged for very similar reasons. Brown and Garner are the names of the two young black men who were killed by these police officers. The decision not to indict has sparked outrage and disbelief which has been felt globally.

Brown

Michael Brown was shot by police officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri, after Brown had robbed a local convenience store. The official account of the incident is that Brown kept approaching Wilson in a threatening manner so Wilson shot in response six times until Brown was dead. However some bystanders claim that Brown raised his arms in the air to surrender as the gun was fired and excessive force has been used. A grand jury case decided not to indict Wilson but Browns family is seeking a court case for ‘unlawful killing’. The US Justice Department is also investigating possible civil and constitutional rights violations in Brown’s killing and has launched an investigation into the Ferguson police department.

The over-riding sentiment in Ferguson is that this is a case about race; a white male police officer has shot and killed a young black man in public. Tensions have always been high between the police and the black community in Ferguson due to ‘stop and search’ polices. In Ferguson last year, 86% of stops, 92% of searches and 93% of arrests were of black people — despite the fact that police officers were far less likely to find contraband on black drivers (22% versus 34% of whites). Add to this that only 6% of the police force is black whilst over 50% of the population is black and it is easy to see that the black population of Ferguson are under-represented as well as feeling persecuted. This shooting has added to that feeling, especially now that Wilson will not be indicted. To some it signals that black lives are not important and that white police officers can do as they please and get away with it.

The shooting sparked protests and riots across the city which was provoked further with the use of SWAT and military equipment by the police to contain the protests.  This has raised some important questions in America about use of military equipment by police forces across the country. The scenes from Ferguson could have easily been from a war-torn region in Iraq as the pictures featured SWAT teams, heavy artillery and even tanks on the ground in an attempt to contain protesters. This disproportionate reaction did nothing to calm the situation, if anything it further enraged the population as the city became militarized and had enforced upon it a curfew.

Garner

The second case is that of Eric Garner. He was stopped in July by police officers in Staten Island on suspicion of selling untaxed ‘loose’ cigarettes. A video shot by a bystander shows Garner resisting arrest as a plainclothes officer attempts to handcuff him. Backing away from the officer, Garner tells him: “This stops today,” The officer, Daniel Pantaleo, struggles with Garner before placing him in a chokehold – banned under police policy- then pushing the asthmatic man to the ground with the aid of other officers. In the video he can clearly be heard to repeatedly say ‘I can’t breathe’ until his body goes limp. Again, a grand jury decided not to indict Pantaleo despite the medical examiner ruling the death homicide.

This case sparked larger but more peaceful protests across New York than those seen in Ferguson. The chant ‘I can’t breathe’ could be heard all over the city. This case attracted more popular support because the video footage existed showing exactly what occurred unlike in the case of Brown where there was contradictory eye witness accounts. The failure of the courts to indict Pantaleo again drives the narrative of race being a large part of the decision. Two separate decisions, both of which have devalued the lives of black people in America.

Most citizens of New York have expressed confusion over the decision and it has also cast doubt over the effectiveness of introducing body cameras on police officers. It has long been assumed that having their actions recorded would alter both the public and the police officers interactions with each other for the better but this decision casts a shadow over this. When a recording exists of an officer unlawfully killing a man and he is let go then what reasons would exist for a police officer to alter their behaviour for a body camera. Every decision would be defended by the police force creating a stand-off between the public and the police as perceptions on the incidents clashed.

In both situations it is argued that excessive force has been used by the police officer in question. This raises the issue of the quality of police training; sufficient training must be put in place to teach an officer when it is appropriate to draw their weapon and how to handle those resisted arrest without causing bodily harm. Guns should not be the first port of call for an officer yet more and more people are dying from gunshots from police officers every year. In the garner case a banned chokehold was used to overcome garner. At no point should this manoeuvre even be taught, it is banned because it is proven to be dangerous. These actions cannot go unpunished or ignored; instead funds need to be invested into police force training, not just to buy excessive military equipment that escalates situations but to educate officers on how to approach difficult situations.

The cases have highlighted that institutional racism is still alive and well in America. The message has been sent that black lives mean less than whites. This idea cannot go unopposed nor can the obvious use of black stereotypes by police officers when on the streets. Too many black people are stopped and searched creating fear and anger towards the police in these communities. This creates a tension which only requires one incident to ignite it into flames; Ferguson illustrates this clearly. Police forces need to be more proportionate in relation to the population of the community they are policing. To have only 6% of black policemen in a high populated black area is unreasonable and illustrates that either racism is preventing more blacks to enter the force or that the relationship with the community in question is so bad that no black people want to be police officers. Both reasons indicate that something is deeply wrong with America. In the 21^st century we should no longer be reading stories about racism, it’s time that this issue was addressed face on. Hopefully these cases will  have sparked the debated needed to initiate change so that in the future race will play no part in any decision making process and that police officers will answer for their actions, whether they or the victim be white or black.

Gunpowder and Treason

Remember, remember the fifth of November
Gunpowder, treason and plot.
I see no reason, why gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot

 

These days many do not question celebrating bonfire night. Yet what is it exactly that we are celebrating? Is it the memory of man brave enough to attempt something so dramatic against his own government? Or is it that this assassination attempt was defeated? For some, the film ‘V for Vendetta’ represents the feelings behind bonfire night now more accurately than its historical origins. The films call for revolution speaks to many and is one of the reasons why the Guy Fawkes mask is used to often by protesters these days; the face represents ‘V’, his beliefs and also when a large group wears them it represents solidarity.

Last night the million mask march descended on the streets of London. Loosely organised by the online activist group, ‘Anonymous’, thousands occupied outside the houses of Parliament, Trafalgar square and Buckingham palace wearing Guy Fawkes masks to protest against government.

Those joining the march have no one set of beliefs or reason behind their protest. Instead every person has their own reasons for being there and for showing their displeasure at our government. These reasons range from anger at the failure to properly investigate reports of child abuse, the austerity cuts, war, to the Palestine/Israeli conflict to name but a few. No matter what the reason, these people are making their presence and discontentment known.

Unfortunately mainstream media/news sources tend to ignore the reasons that people to take to the street and instead focus on reporting that a few, out of the thousands that marched, were arrested after ‘scuffles’ broke out. Also reported was the London’s Metropolitan police stating that they had tried to contact anonymous before the march to organise a peaceful protest with police help but they had been ignored. I feel like I am stating the obvious when I say that of course they were ignored. The march is a rebellion against authority, it represents the publics call for revolution; pre-arranging it with the police, which no doubt would have put restrictions on the protests, would have defeated the point in the march.

The media should be reporting the feelings behind the protest as they do with other protests across the world. By reporting it in the way that they have, it feeds into the image that the news media is no longer the watchdog of the government; instead it is its lapdog. No more is this obvious than in the reporting of this protest every year. It would be ironic based on the historical origins of bonfire night if it wasn’t so disheartening.

For many though bonfire night is a night to light up the skies with fireworks, enjoy the local amusements or display and enjoy it with family and friends. Whatever the reason you celebrate or how you celebrate it, just keep in mind its roots in society. When reading about any protests the next day remember why this date is so significant. Remember to question the media’s coverage and reasons behind it. Remember to question why people feel so passionate as to take to the streets. Remember, remember the 5^th of November.

The World Watches

 

 

The conflict between Israel and Palestine enters its 25^th day with a failed 72 hour humanitarian ceasefire. It didn’t even last 12 hours. This occurs one day after the news that Israeli bombing had killed 19 women and children seeking shelter in a UN school.

 

United nation officials have condemned the behaviour, calling the attack on the school a disgrace to the world. So harrowing are the images and scenes on the ground that one UN official broke down in tears during a live interview with AL Jazeera. Officials have also stated that the Israeli military knew they were targeting a school that housed refugees as the co-ordinates had been provided to Israeli officials 17 times in the past three weeks of the conflict.

 

A recurring theme emerging from all reports from the conflict is that innocent Palestinian children are suffering. Jon Snow recently recorded a short piece on his experiences whilst in the Gaza strip reporting on the conflict. This YouTube clip can never be aired on channel 4 news because he talks passionately about the young children he saw maimed and killed by Israeli bombs. Snow speaks out to the public, baring his opinions to all and calling on the public to speak out for these innocent lives that are being needlessly destroyed.

Yet despite the outcry that the violence has caused the world looks on: officials decry the violence and try to broker ceasefires but that’s it. No sanctions have been threatened unlike the sanctions that are currently in operation with Russia nor are Israel’s allies applying any pressure to try and stop the conflict. The US and UK condemn the actions but never directly blame the Israeli army, instead stating that each incident needs further investigation, even when over whelming evidence exists of Israel’s unprovoked attacks.

 

The lobbying powers that Israel friendly groups have in the UK and US have a massive impact on both these countries actions. It has been noted for some time that to be pro-Palestine means you are automatically declared anti-Semitic, particularly in the US. Both countries have continued to supply and replenish Israel’s ammo throughout the conflict despite the growing numbers of dead Palestinian civilians: a number currently sitting at roughly 1360 on my last check. Instead the UK and USA rhetoric is focused around Hamas as a terrorist organisation that Israel is defending themselves against.

 

Yet with the odds so thoroughly against them it’s not surprising that many young men and women in the Gaza strip do join the radical group, Hamas. This group provides a place to vent anger and to defend themselves against a bully. That’s all Israel is in this situation, a larger bully who needs to assert its dominance over the weaker state by pummelling it into submission. With the international backing that Israel receives it’s unlikely that they will stop this bullying any time soon.

 

Russell brand found his YouTube hits growing quickly when he dissected an interview on Fox News to discuss the Palestinian and Israel conflict. He pointed out the blatant biased and aggression that the interviewer treated the Palestinian guest; not allowing him any time to respond fully to questions or justify Palestinians actions. Yet he gave the Israel representative uninterrupted time to promote the official view, that Israel is defending itself from terrorists and Americans hate terrorist.

 

Bolivia recently took the brave stance of declaring Israel as terrorists. Previously it had cancelled a visa agreement with the state but they have taken it one step further this time in making their opinions clear on the actions of the country. This extremely brave action shows a small country that is willing to stand up against unjust violence and support the oppressed Palestinians instead of being bullied into justifying Israel’s actions.

 

The situation has went on for so long and both countries are at fault but with the world becoming a smaller place and the international community wielding a lot of power it cannot be allowed to continue. Generations should not be brought up in such environments, in either side of the conflict. The world needs to look beyond the media representation of the conflict and get to the heart and the truth of it in order to prosecute any of those who have committed these heinous crimes. Only then could the countries move on and start to rebuild themselves and provide a better future for these children who currently have no future at all.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cu3lYK6OmMI  – Al Jazeera interview

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_m98GAdqKM – Russell brand

http://www.channel4.com/news/the-children-of-gaza-jon-snow-video – Jon snow

 

History of Tattoos

dissertation extract.

 

 

In order to understand tattoos place in current society it is essential to know the history of the tattoo in Europe and America. The origins and associations of the tattoo over the years have had a huge impact on the modern idea of a tattoo as its forms and wearers have altered dramatically over the years and have shaped the modern tattoo and the modern stereotypes of tattooed individuals. Originally tattoos were used by small tribes for numerous reasons including initiation rituals, exchange and identity; these tattoos were basic lines and pictures that created intricate designs. When the Greeks first came in contact with these tribes they considered them primitive designs associated with primitive individuals, however, they were adopted by the Greeks as a way to mark exiles and criminals (Fisher, 2002). The marks were considered to represent those who are outside accepted society and started the long standing association between tattoos and ‘outsiders’. The Romans adopted this technique often marking criminals with their crime as they felt that this visible marking would ensure that the criminals could never escape their deed and that society would know what the individual had done (Gustafson, 2000). This practice went out of fashion over the years and tattooing remained a very rare practice up until its rediscovery by Captain Cook in 1769. He discovered Tahiti with the British navy and brought back the practice of tattooing to Europe when his crew and he started to be tattooed by natives in 1784 reintroducing the practice of tattoos into wider society. Cook was also the first westerner to use the Tahiti word ta-tu or tatua and introduced the word to Europe, before this tattoos were known as pricking. The mixing of western and native ideas created new designs that mixed the geometric native designs with western images such as boats and guns (DeMello, 2000:45). After this reintroduction tattoo shops opened in both America and Europe and tattoos became a part of society, particularly amongst the working class and sailors. It was in fact sailors, and later people in carnivals, that helped the transition of tattoos from primitive to something exotic and adventurous (DeMello, 2000:49).

                        From this reintroduction tattoos have remained within western society until modern day but have went through many changes. Tattooing was not a socially acceptable act until the late 1800’s when it became fashionable with the middle and upper class. Up until this time tattoos were purely adopted by sailors, military men and the working class and were rudimentary designs poorly done. Tattoos became more popular with the middle and upper classes at this time for two main reasons; the introduction of Japanese style tattoos and the invention of the electric tattoo machine by Sam O’Reilly in roughly 1892 (Fisher, 2002). The Japanese style was popular among the higher classes as it embodied a sense of worldliness and sophistication and was used as a way to impress others in society. A distinct class divide still existed in the imagery and use of tattoos. The lower classes used tattoos as a means to express themselves to society while the upper classes used tattoos as a means to impress others. This class divide has prevailed through time and still exists today to some extent, with lower class tattoos typically being of poorer quality due to money restraints as cheaper tattoos are of a lower quality. These tattoos are looked down upon while upper class tattoos are of better quality and often flaunted by the wearer because these people can afford to pay for the higher quality and wish to show it off. The invention of the electric tattoo machine also contributed greatly to the growing popularity of tattoos in all classes. This machine meant tattoos were less painful and required less skill in the part of the tattooist so more tattoo shops opened up. New images and styles were easily achieved and led to the growth of the tattoo industry. Sam O’Reilly also introduced flash sheets to the tattooing word. These are sheets of basic tattoo designs, such as a red rose, that most if not all, tattoo shops have on display. These tattoos are mass-produced and are still commonly associated with the working class (Fisher, 2002). The growing popularity of tattoos also led to a growing culture divide in terms of quality and design.

            From the early 1800s right through till the early 1900s heavily tattooed men and women entered circuses and travelling shows as ‘freak’ attractions (DeMello, 2000:56). These tattooed individuals were in competition with each other and they had to have larger numbers of tattoos to remain in employment. By 1932 there were roughly three hundred completely tattooed individuals in travelling shows. This created a strong association between tattoos and deviant behaviour as the tattooed individuals were considered ‘outsiders’ and ‘freaks’, an echo of the ideas from the Romans and Greeks. Often the tattooed individual would claim to have been held captive by natives and forcibly tattooed; this added a level of danger and exoticism to the whole experience of seeing a tattooed individual. When women first entered the tattoo scene they completely upstaged their male counterparts. Due to the captive stories the women were considered feminine and refined despite their tattoos because they had not chosen to be tattooed but forced. Overt sexual overtones were laced through their stories and in order to show their tattoos they had to wear very little clothes which created a very strong link between sexuality and tattoos. This sexual image of women clashed with the traditional image of chaste, demure women, this made tattooed women more exotic but it created an association between tattoos and sexuality with women. These tattooed women’s acts were also known commonly as a ‘freak show with a peep show’ (Mifflin, 1997). This idea of women and tattoos exist still today with many tattooed women being considered sexually promiscuous. Eventually these travelling shows died out and the novelty of seeing a tattooed individual wore off, however the connection between tattoos and social outsiders continued in society’s collective image of tattoos.

Although tattoos worn by carnival people were highly socially unacceptable, tattoos linked to the military in the years between World War one and two were highly regarded due to the association with Uncle Sam and the fighting boys in America. This strong association between the military and tattoos was a continuation from their use during the civil war. Any individual with a tattoo was assumed to serve in the military and strongly influenced society’s idea on tattoos and tattooed individuals. This period strongly influenced the design and placement of tattoos for the future (DeMello, 2000:63). However, from the 1950’s onwards tattoos popularity went downhill. Military tattoos were rejected by society as they were a reminder of the damage caused by the wars and many ex-servicemen found it difficult to get employment due to their tattoos. It is at this time that gang tattoos also came into the public eye and cemented the negative image of them. This is when being tattooed restricted an individual’s employment and social mobility as many associated them with gangs or ex-military, both groups which were perceived as unwanted (Govenar, 2000). In many cities in America tattooing was banned and the biker community adopted them as a way to openly rebel creating a new style of tattoo revolving around images such as skulls and motorbikes. During this period there were a few women with tattoos; those who did were either part of the biker gang or of the sexual revolution. These women were often ridiculed by wider society and helped to create the masculine image of tattooed women as either being gay or tough. Steward (1990) famously said in his book that women with tattoos were ‘lank-haired scrags with ruined landscape faces and sagging hose and run-over heels’. This was a common perception of women with tattoos in this time. Tattoos eventually became popular again in the 1970s and have grown in popularity since for a number of reasons including celebrities and TV programmes centred on tattoo shops. However, the past opinions of tattoos still echo in the minds of people today and affect the stereotypes and image of tattoos. The strong stigma attached to tattoos still prevails, particularly towards women with tattoos.

 

interview 1 – part 2

So you’ve said you’ve worked in a variety of call centres so you will have taken plenty of first calls. How does the first call in a new job go, and how did your very first call ever go?

The first call centre I worked in it was a help desk so basically what my job was, was to take calls from Sainsbury stores when something wasn’t working. So I would speak to the facilities managers in these stores they would tell me what was wrong, I would put the information in the system then I would tell them the estimated time for the contractor to get there. Maybe I would have to contact contractors or the store if something changed. The first job I actually had to deal with customers was outbound, so where I’m contacting customers to cross sell them. For me to be honest it was a bit nervous but once you get the first one done, once you realise the worst the customer can say is no you tend to be not as bad. But you do get a lot of people that are absolutely terrified of taking their first call because they have this notion that the customers going to come on and shout at them. Especially if you’re working in an inbound sales role where the customer is calling you because they want something. Your first call you’re only expected to do what they want, put the information in the system and that’s it. You’re not expected to do anything else just get through the call.

So first call in every job then, do you approach it the same way, just get it done and dusted?

Pretty much. I’ve worked on the phones for that long that it doesn’t really faze me. I’ve always been confused about people get so nervous about it as when you go for your interview you do a role play which these days is done on the phone. You should look at it as another role play. The people that are interviewing you make the role play harder than the job so you’re better equipped to handle the pressure and the call. You know more about the products and you’ve been through the training, you have your team mates and support now. You’ve already done your first call.

 

During the training process you said that you get trained on dealing with customers. By the time you get on the phones do you feel equipped to deal with them?

No. To deal with customer enquiries, aye, because you have the knowledge to answer questions. Well, if you’ve retained that knowledge, my first call in every role, everything I’ve just learned goes straight out my head. It goes because you’re concentrating on getting the call done and talking to the customer you’re not thinking you need to find something or answer a question. But to deal with customers I don’t think you’re well equipped. That comes from being on the phone. Answering enquiries aye, if you’ve been trained properly and paying attention, but the only way to learn how to deal with customers is to do it. They can tell you this is a customer type, this is how you deal with a customer type but you very rarely get a customer that exactly matches a customer type. Everybody’s different. Everyone reacts differently to the people they’re speaking too. It might be you come on and your accents Scottish so they automatically get their back up if their English because they think they won’t get anything out them. The reason there’s more call centres in Scotland than anywhere else in the country is that people trust the Scottish accent. But the only way to learn is to go speak to customers.

Do you think that customers affect your mood and your day?

They can do. Your always told that you leave your life at the door and if you have a bad call you put it behind you and don’t let it affect you but it’s not quite as easy as that. If you have a call where I customer is calling you for everything it’s going to affect you. I always think your first call of the day defines the type of day you’re going to have. If your first day is a great call it will put you in a good mood for the rest of the day but on the flip side if you have a bad call it can put you in a negative mood for the day.